MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413037713 · doi:10.1111/jar.70107

Parents' Emotional Journey Throughout Their Participation in a Well‐Being Support Group Intervention

2025· article· en· W4413037713 on OpenAlexafffund
Mélina Boulé, Mélina Rivard, Catherine Mello

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéFonds de Recherche du Québec-Société et CultureStrategic Innovation Fund
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)PsychologyEmotional supportPsychological interventionSession (web analytics)Support groupClinical psychologyEmotional well-beingEmotional disorderPsychotherapistDevelopmental psychologySocial supportPsychiatryAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Family carers often lack support for their own well-being as they navigate diagnostic and early intervention services for intellectual and developmental disabilities. METHODS: This study explored the emotional journey of carers during Early Positive Approaches to Support, an 8-week group program. Participants journaled their emotional experiences at the beginning and end of each session. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in comfortable emotions and a decrease in uncomfortable emotions by the program's end. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the program improved carers' ability to self-regulate their emotions and manage challenges. This study also highlights the value of self-observation to understand carers' emotional landscapes in interventions targeting their well-being.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.124
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Research in Intellectual DisabilitiesSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207